Matthew Haag yesterday posted a pretty fascinating follow-up from last Thursday’s DISD school board briefing, the one in which board members questioned and criticized Mike Miles’ proposed pay-for-performance plan for teachers.

Some background: Miles wants DISD to institute this plan, which bases a teacher’s salary on an evaluation of his or her performance. The evaluation score is 50 percent based on “results” and 50 percent classroom performance, defined as “high-quality instruction.”

Trustees rightly expressed concerns. I say rightly for several reasons, one of which is that it only has proven success in Miles’ previous district, in Colorado Springs.

I just flew in and out of Colorado Springs last month. It’s not the smallest U.S. airport I’ve ever flown into, because I’ve flown into Rapid City (South Dakota) Regional Airport. But they’re on par.

In Colorado Springs, I watched an American Airlines desk agent dealing with my lost luggage — I was the only person at the main check-in desk for 20 minutes — hand the phone to his colleague and ask her to play travel agent to a person whose computer was down. This is not a megalopolis.

The larger problem comes from Haag’s fact-checking. Although I think Miles is on pretty solid ground when he says we need more hard data to reward good teachers (and it is assumed punish bad ones), the hard evidence he says proves how effective his plan has been doesn’t seem to exist.

Miles, when pressed by board members on whether the plan has been proven successful beyond Colorado Springs, said it has been praised by independent groups.

I think you know where this is going. Haag checked out that claim and found, yeah, not so much. The praise was limited to simply citing news stories or Miles himself.

I mean, Jesus. You just can’t do this. Look, I read the plan. I’m sort of against the idea of pay-for-performance in general, and certainly for administrators. But read Miles’ explanation of its methodology. I have to say, it sounds pretty damn good on its face. In general, I’m for basing decisions on good data, and this seems as though it could produce just that on teacher performance.

But you can’t just bullshit your way through this job. You can’t lie when asked to prove your point. The ends don’t justify the means. It’s true whether you’re circumventing internal hiring rules to hire (allegedly) great people or trying to praise your (allegedly) top-notch teacher evaluation program.

This is a big district. There are competing, sometimes warring, factions you must placate. This isn’t freaking Colorado Springs. Stop it or go home.

Elsewhere

I live across the street from this building just purchased downtown. We call it the Asia Wok building. Fun fact: A doorway on its east side is used every day as a bathroom and has an overpowering fecal odor. Hope the new developers keep its character!

Guns don’t kill people. People who riddle a car with bullets kill people.

Why do I feel like “the Texas Department of Public Safety’s Driver License Mega Center in Garland” was lifted from a David Foster Wallace novel?

Retweets

Of COURSE it is.

Let me guess: machete? Kick to the face? Large rock? I must know what could have been used to kill this person.